A little over a month ago, we discussed the superficiality of policy debates in New Hampshire in Tax Foundation Rates New Hampshire #3 … So What?
… should New Hampshire’s tax policy be to achieve as high a rating as possible on the Tax Foundation’s “competitive index”? The Governor, the local Koch organization, and GOP State Reps appear to think it self-evident that it should. …
The Tax Foundation’s “competitive index” is a subjective, not an objective, standard. That is, it represents the opinion of the individuals and/or organizations that control the Tax Foundation. …
Shouldn’t we be discussing whether New Hampshire’s current tax structure, and in particular its heavy reliance on property taxes to fund public education, can be improved? Information such as the Tax Foundation’s “competitive index” should inform the discussion, not be the end of the discussion.
To paraphrase President Reagan, there they go again. This time it’s the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy, which bills itself “NH’s free-market think tank,” ranking New Hampshire the freest place in North America, a ranking the Granite State has apparently held for 24 years. And, predictably, the “usual suspects” scurried to X and their friends in the local press to proclaim “we’re #1, we’re #1.”
Before you join the “we’re #1” chant, note that the Josiah Bartlett “report” purports to measure “economic freedom” not freedom in general. And just as the Tax Foundation’s “competitive index” was based on a subjective, not an objective, standard, so too Josiah Bartlett’s report rewards policies that Drew Kline favors.
To be clear, we are not arguing that Josiah Bartlett’s report should be rejected out of hand or is singularly unhelpful. Rather, we are arguing that New Hampshire’s political leaders should have a clear-headed discussion about public policy, as opposed to the NHGOP’s approach of outsourcing policy-making to libertarian “think-tanks”. As we said about the Tax Foundation’s “competitive-index,” the Josiah Bartlett report should inform the discussion, not end the discussion.
As to freedom more generally, we have to say that New Hampshire’s libertarians have made New Hampshire less politically free. At the core of the “New Hampshire Advantage” is “local control,” allowing cities/towns to govern themselves as opposed to one-size-fits-all State laws. Essentially, “local control” is federalism on a State level.
By passing earlier this year a number of State laws that override local land-use laws and force development on cities/towns, the legislature and Governor likely have forced cities/towns to hike property taxes. More development means the need for more municipal services such as police, fire, roads, road-repairs, snow-plows, overtime, teachers, etc., etc. etc.. If taxes on the new development do not cover the cost of these added services, cities/towns must raise property taxes across the board.
Local control of land-use laws allows cities/towns to manage growth and exercise control over local property taxes. The one-size-fits-all State zoning code that libertarians and Koch Reps/Senators appear intent on enacting materially reduces the power of cities/towns to govern themselves. Notably, Josiah Bartlett has been one of the most ardent advocates for a one-size-fits-all State zoning code that forces development on cities/towns, making cities/towns less free.
Authors’ opinions are their own and may not represent those of Grok Media, LLC, GraniteGrok.com, its sponsors, readers, authors, or advertisers.
Got Something to Say, We Want to Hear It. Comment or submit Op-Eds to steve@granitegrok.com
